Axelrod: ‘This is essentially a tea party downgrade’

It appears the new Democratic talking point on Friday’s S&P downgrade of the U.S. credit rating is to blame on the tea party, by referring to it as a “tea party downgrade.”

That phrase began to surface Sunday on morning talk shows, first with Democratic Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry and then with President Barack Obama’s presidential campaign adviser David Axelrod.

On CBS’ “Face the Nation,” Axelrod explained his interpretation of the downgrade. He argued it had more to do with the country’s politics and less to do with its finances.

“Well, first of all, let’s see how the markets react because I think there’s a broad consensus that this is still the safest place to put your money,” he said.

“You know, we can debate the strength of the analysis that they did, the history of S&P and so on. They made an egregious analytical error here but theirs was largely a political analysis. That’s what we should focus on because what they were saying is they want to see the political system work. They want to see a sense of compromise. They want to see the kind of solution that the president has been fighting for, a large solution that will team with the problem, that will be balance, that will include revenues, that will deal with some of our long-term issues. We still made some progress in the compromise that was struck on the debt. What they’re saying is we have to make more progress. In fact we do. That’s what the next few months is going to be all about.” (RELATED: Standard & Poor’s ratings head: U.S. could be downgraded even further)

During his appearance on “Face the Nation,” Axelrod also argued that in crafting a solution to America’s debt problem, lawmakers must address the problem “in a way that is fair to everyone” — by which he meant that he believed the wealthy had to put more skin in the game.

“First of all, there’s no doubt that the brinksmanship that we saw was atrocious and that contributed their analysis,” Axelrod said.

“But let’s review exactly what happened. For months the president was saying let’s get together. Let’s compromise. Let’s do a $4 trillion package that will really stabilize the debt and get us on the right path. Let’s do it in a way that is fair to everyone so that the wealthiest Americans are kicking in as well as the middle class and everyone else in the country. We close these egregious loopholes. We deal with long-term structural issues, everybody giving up some of their sacred cows in order to achieve that result. And we thought we had such an arrangement with the Speaker of the House, who showed interest in it, Mr. Boehner. Then he went back to his caucus. He had to yield to the most strident voices in his party. They played brinkmanship with the full faith and credit of the United States. This was the result of that. You know, there is a lesson in that. Compromise cannot be a dirty word. We have to work together to solve this problem. We have to do it in a way that’s fair and balanced and meaningful.”


    Has ANYONE wondered if John McClown would have accompliched anything AT ALL? AMerica would have been downgraded before the last election because A furtherance of Reaganomics would have kept the economy underwater throught the whole crisis.

    The debt ceiling was never the issue, it was all about say NO because no card carrying KKKublican can STAND having an Uncle Tom like Obama ALWAYS being a better man than any of them. it has been about RACE since Hillary’s crew published the photos of Obama in kenyan dress and swore to the world he was a muslim. These same Racists swear he is NOT American, pals around with terrorists, and is weak because He is intelligent enough to talk and compromise. 

    I think a 2nd Ammendment remedy for all the REDS in America is a fine idea. 


    John K144. Take an economics class. The Reaganomic Fraud of trickle down/supply side theory (where you tax the poor and skill their kids in expensive and no productive wars) has worked EXACTLY as planned. When Bush and Paulsen hatched the $300/600 tax rebates of March 2008, they did it to stave off the inevitable, hoping for a Democratic president to be elected BEFORE the unavoidable collapse of a 0 interest, deregulated, unsupervised financial policy. That tax spending spree gave an artificial GDP of 3.9% for the second quarter of 2008. Thus the promise “the fundamentals of the economy are fine!” became the joke of the decade that September 21st. Sadly, it was the Republican misers that cooked their own goose and caused the Republican TARP necessity (which has actually accomplished it’s goal) to be a precursor of the underfunded Stimulus.

    The Republican failures of EXACTLY those same concepts and ineptitudes prolonged the Great Depression in the mid 30’s. AFTER PROOF of the success of Governmental spending on infrastructure projects (JOBS!) by Roosevelt from ’32 -36, America would have enjoyed a fully prosperous recovery in 1938, instead of a double dip recession and economic stagnation that you and I are guaranteed for the next decade+.

     Same thing happened in Japan in the 90’s, they made massive influxes of Governmental capital i the beginning and never followed through. 2 decades later, they are in the same place they were to begin with. The TEA Party grandfathers sabotaged America in the mid 30’s and these reactionary loudmouths are guaranteeing further failures and impoverishment with a provably failed concept.  TEAparty Errornomics has brought Kruschev’s promise to fruition. 

    “America will fall from within. And since 9/11, Republican policy has made America the Soviet Union style aggressors of this century and Teaparyism will bring us even closer to communism (where a select few control ‘the property of the workers’)  and seems hellbent of making capitalism FAIL on a global scale!

    Just say NO to the party of NO!
    Check your history.

  • Msterrietata

    It is no longer the democrat or the republican party. We are now in the age of the “rich”…rich people who control everything…and then there’s the poor. The rich control the banks, stock markets, and big businesses. The president and our representatives are puppets for their “cash dreams”. I wonder how much money Axelrod receives as their pond? 

  • joanf

    Axelrod, looked like a  deer in the headlights today. He  always appeared so self assured,smug and relaxed, but the heat is on and Axelrod is feeling it. The know it all, finally found out that he doesn’t have the clout he used to have and it shows.

  • Pingback: John Kerry: Downgrade was Tea Party’s fault « HaltingArkansasLiberalswithTruth

  • Anonymous

    Strange isn’t that in 2010 Nancy Pelosi said the Tea Party was just Astroturf.

    Only the Tea Party Had a $4 Trillion Plan

    Here was the question to S&P exec John Chambers, and his reply:

    Q: “There’s been a figure of $4 trillion dollars circulating as an example of the scope of fiscal consolidation measures that could work to stabilize the U.S. debt-gdp ratios. Could you explain how that figure was arrived at since it was mentioned in S&P’s reports and where it figures in S&P analysis?”
    A: “First of all, that figure comes initially from the Bowles-Simpson fiscal commission, and it was embraced by President Obama in his April 13 speech and Paul Ryan in his counter-budget proposal. And so you had policy makers converging around the amount. Now actually the $4 trillion, depending on whether it is front-loaded or back-loaded, is not going to do the trick in terms of stabilizing U.S. government debt-to GDP ratios. But it takes you pretty far along. And I think a grand bargain of that nature would signal, you know, the seriousness of policy makers to address the fiscal issues of the United States, to actually stabilize the debt-to-GDP. The IMF says it takes 7.5% of GDP consolidation. I think we have more than that.”
    The U.S. annual budget deficit is now around 9% of GDP.
    Chambers adds: “But $4 trillion would be a good down payment. We thought that..if policy makers could deliver the goods on that, then that would be a strong sign on our political scores and eventually on our projections on the fiscal side.”
    S&P has already said it may slash the Triple-A rating if a debt ceiling deal is not accompanied by what it deems is a credible plan to cut the $14.3 trillion federal [debt] by $4 trillion. The plan has “to have bipartisan support,” Chambers said. “If you have a plan that is only backed by one side or the other, even if you got it through, you would be faced with the prospect of it being unwound.”

    So, S&P’s Chambers is saying the ratings agency wants to see at least a $4 trillion deal, one that would come with bipartisan support, too, because the ratings agency fears without that support, Congress will upend any debt-cutting plan.
    There was only ever one plan that did what S&P said was required — $4 trillion in cuts with bipartisan support. That’d be Cut, Cap, and Balance — a plan that cut $4 trillion and got bipartisan support in the House of Representatives.
    As Democrats tonight, and some Republicans, lash out and blame the Tea Party for causing the United States to lose its credit rating, it is worth pointing out that only the Tea Party offered up a plan to avoid what happened.

  • Pingback: The Angry White Guy » Blog Archive » More Liberal Propaganda… Blame the Tea Party

  • PhoebeMoses

    Essentially a political hack for Obama….a politician whose only concern is getting re-elected.

  • PhoebeMoses

    Essentially a political hack for Obama….a politician whose only concern is getting re-elected.